Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Recommended Topics

  • Posts

    • Credit file: One account(showing balance of £0 due) for main line showing missed payments from December 2020 (when the contract itself was terminated in August 2020). One account(showing loan of £204 due) for second line showing as being in default since November 2020. As a result of these my credit score has gone down-this is due directly to these two accounts which showed on my credit report as a 'negative factor'   Credit disadvantage: When my Virgin contract ended, I attempted to take up a new contract with another company. I was prevented from doing so at Vodafone as they required a deposit of £150, plus I would not be entitled to the free handset, but would have had to pay £179 for it and the monthly payments would be increasd. I was able to take out a handset at Three, but again instead of being entitled to it free, I had to pay £189 for it.   I will check carefully to estimate the amount of time involved-I have queries going back to October 2019 attempting to deal with this.   I have also received from Virgin another letter giving me the password to unlock the files they sent me(shame it doesn't actually work) and a second email again confirming they will erase my data unless they have to keep it.   I'm wondering if they're planning to use that email as their response for the ICO where he gave them until March 11 to either tell me what they are going to do to put things right or explain why they believe they have met their data protection obligations'?      
    • “We want to get Amigo back to life again” – CEO’s statement as lender posts £87m loss View the full article
    • My case is adjourned to this Month. I'm about to send out my Supplementary Witness Statement. Could someone please check if the following is efficient? My court cost is now over £1000 as it was adjourned 3 times  Thanks!   Supplementary Witness Statement to address the new case exhibits introduced at the hearing on 10 November 2020   VCS v Ward  1.       This case is often quoted by the claimant as assisting their case. However in this instance it actually assists mine. It is contended that the act of stopping a vehicle does not amount to parking. This predatory operation pays no regard to the byelaws at all. It is likely that this Claimant may try to rely upon two 'trophy case' wins, namely VCS v Crutchley and/or VCS v Ward, neither of which were at an Airport location. Both involve flawed reasoning and the Courts were wrongly steered by this Claimant's representative; there are worrying errors in law within those cases, such as an irrelevant reliance upon the completely different Supreme Court case. These are certainly not the persuasive decisions that this Claimant may suggest.  Semark-Jullien Case  2.       Whilst it is known that another case that was struck out on the same basis was appealed to Salisbury Court (the Semark-Jullien case), the parking industry did not get any finding one way or the other about the illegality of adding the same costs twice. The Appeal Judge merely pointed out that he felt that insufficient information was known about the Semark-Jullien facts of the case (the Defendant had not engaged with the process and no evidence was in play, unlike in the Crosby case) and so the Judge listed it for a hearing and felt that case (alone) should not have been summarily struck out due to a lack of any facts and evidence.  3.       The Judge at Salisbury correctly identified as an aside, that costs were not added in the Beavis case. That is because this had already been addressed in ParkingEye's earlier claim, the pre-Beavis High Court (endorsed by the Court of Appeal) case ParkingEye v Somerfield  a. (ref para 419): https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2011/4023.html  ''It seems to me that, in the present case, it would be difficult for ParkingEye to justify, as against any motorist, a claim for payment of the enhanced sum of £135 if the motorist took the point that the additional £60 over and above the original figure of £75 constituted a penalty. It might be possible for ParkingEye to show that the additional administrative costs involved were substantial, though I very much doubt whether they would be able to justify this very large increase on that basis. On the face of it, it seems to me that the predominant contractual function of this additional payment must have been to deter the motorist from breaking his contractual obligation to pay the basic charge of £75 within the time specified, rather than to compensate ParkingEye for late payment. Applying the formula adopted by Colman J. in the Lordsvale case, therefore, the additional £60 would appear to be penal in nature; and it is well established that, in those circumstances, it cannot be recovered, though the other party would have at least a theoretical right to damages for breach of the primary obligation.''  
    • I'm ready to reject Hermes offer and issue the letter before claim. I've registered on the MCOL website and filled in my claim with the below particulars.   Should I tick the box to send the particulars directly to the defendant?   Should I also tick the box for the right to claim interest. If so do what date would I put for when the money became owed,  what is daily rate of interest up to the date of judgment?    Thanks again      
    • Zoom boss calls working from home "new reality" and predicts growth - but not at last year's pace. View the full article
  • Our picks

    • I sent in the bailiffs to the BBC. They collected £350. It made me smile.
        • Haha
        • Like
    • Hi @BankFodder
      Sorry for only updating you now, but after your guidance with submitting the claim it was pretty straight forward and I didn't want to unnecessarily waste your time. Especially with this guide you wrote here, so many thanks for that
      So I issued the claim on day 15 and they requested more time to respond.
      They took until the last day to respond and denied the claim, unsurprisingly saying my contract was with Packlink and not with them.
       
      I opted for mediation, and it played out very similarly to other people's experiences.
       
      In the first call I outlined my case, and I referred to the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 as the reason to why I do in fact have a contract with them. 
       
      In the second call the mediator came back with an offer of the full amount of the phone and postage £146.93, but not the court costs. I said I was not willing to accept this and the mediator came across as a bit irritated that I would not accept this and said I should be flexible. I insisted that the law was on my side and I was willing to take them to court. The mediator went back to Hermes with what I said.
       
      In the third call the mediator said that they would offer the full amount. However, he said that Hermes still thought that I should have taken the case against Packlink instead, and that they would try to recover the court costs themselves from Packlink.
       
      To be fair to them, if Packlink wasn't based in Spain I would've made the claim against them instead. But since they are overseas and the law lets me take action against Hermes directly, it's the best way of trying to recover the money.
       
      So this is a great win. Thank you so much for your help and all of the resources available on this site. It has helped me so much especially as someone who does not know anything about making money claims.
       
      Many thanks, stay safe and have a good Christmas!
       
       
        • Thanks
    • Hermes and mediation hints. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428981-hermes-and-mediation-hints/&do=findComment&comment=5080003
      • 1 reply
    • Natwest Bank Transfer Fraud Call HMRC Please help. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/428951-natwest-bank-transfer-fraud-call-hmrc-please-help/&do=findComment&comment=5079786
      • 33 replies

Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 1565 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I have received a county court claim from Parking Eye and this has now been passed onto the local county court. I have a reply to complete as I have contested their claim.

 

When the car was parked I had to wait for an auction house to open so that I could collect an item. The car arrived at about 8:30 and the auction huse opened at 9:00. the car was then moved to the entrance to put the item, a very large smart board into the car and it would not fit ... so much so it got stuck in the doorway and this took us over the hour by about 10 minutes but reading above the cart was not parked all of that time in one place.

 

Parking Eye have decided to pursue me the owner for the claim but they do not say nor do they indicate who the driver was, they are just assuming I was the driver.

 

Can anyone give me any ideas of what I might use as my defense in court? or even if I should contact PE prior to the hearing, which hasn't been decided yet.

 

If this is a new thread can someone please move it to one for me please?

Link to post
Share on other sites
I have received a county court claim from Parking Eye and this has now been passed onto the local county court. I have a reply to complete as I have contested their claim.

 

When the car was parked I had to wait for an auction house to open so that I could collect an item. The car arrived at about 8:30 and the auction huse opened at 9:00. the car was then moved to the entrance to put the item, a very large smart board into the car and it would not fit ... so much so it got stuck in the doorway and this took us over the hour by about 10 minutes but reading above the cart was not parked all of that time in one place.

 

Parking Eye have decided to pursue me the owner for the claim but they do not say nor do they indicate who the driver was, they are just assuming I was the driver.

 

Can anyone give me any ideas of what I might use as my defense in court? or even if I should contact PE prior to the hearing, which hasn't been decided yet.

 

If this is a new thread can someone please move it to one for me please?

They are entitled to sue you if they follow certain protocols and PE at least get that right so that is not a defence. So, where was the car parked and was the place you moved to and from part of the same site or was it a case of what is known as "double dipping"? Do you have a receipt for the item you collected? Give us some information and we can help so we need to know where and when the event was, who owns the land or at least who controls it and are there multiple occupiers such as on an industrial estate or just one such as a supermarket?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have received a county court claim from parking eye and this has now been passed onto the local county court.

I have a reply to complete as I have contested their claim.

 

When the car was parked I had to wait for an auction house to open so that I could collect an item.

 

 

The car arrived at about 8:30 and the auction house opened at 9:00.

the car was then moved to the entrance to put the item, a very large smart board into the car and it would not fit .

.. so much so it got stuck in the doorway and this took us over the hour by about 10 minutes

but reading above the car was not parked all of that time in one place.

 

parking eye have decided to pursue me the owner for the claim

but they do not say nor do they indicate who the driver was,

they are just assuming I was the driver.

 

Can anyone give me any ideas of what I might use as my defense in court?

or even if I should contact PE prior to the hearing,

which hasn't been decided yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple answer. Get the auction house to tell parking eye to retract it. They have authority over PE for their car park.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

can you answer the questions I asked in the other thread you tacked you question on to,

it will be very helpful to know more about the site

 

When is the N1 claim dated

as you have a limited time to respond

but if you acknowledge the claim you then get another fortnight to submit a defence

so it may be worth considering using both times and use the difference to chase up the details we ask for.

Link to post
Share on other sites

posts now moved over to this thread for you

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

sounds like you already submitted a defence

and now you have had the notice of allocation?

when is the hearing?

 

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am just waiting to hear when the hearing is due.

 

I can send a copy of what I stated if you need me to and any other info you need.

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

scan it all up and the defence you filed too please

follow the upload

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

you can still add to it up until the time you are ordered to exchange bundles so post up everything and we will try and find something. Have you asked the council about planning permission for the signs? Most parking cos dont have it and that is a criminal offence Criminality= no contract.

Link to post
Share on other sites

most defended claims they fail at

 

 

re the last 2 post

we need to see your defence and what EB wants please

as a PDF

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
This what I have put as my defense on the court form.

 

thanks

 

 

You have your Dunlop tyre cases confused!

Selfridge was a privity of contract / competition case.

The GPEOL / penalty case was Dunlop Pneumatic Tyre Co Ltd v New Garage & Motor Co Ltd.

Link to post
Share on other sites

they win more often than other companies

because they have learned lessons from the past when they lose whereas the others are too stupid to do so.

 

You will need to work hard to beat them on signage, photographing and measuring them,

where they relate to the entrance to the site from the public highway etc.

 

However, often PE havent bothered to renew contracts with the alndowner or have contracts with the wrong entity

and have been too lazy to sort this out so you can show no loocus standi.

 

They like to censor the paperwork when it isnt going their way and claim commercial confidentiality.

Likewise the PP for their signage.

 

 

They prefer to say that it isnt needed when they know damn well it is because they have lost other claims because of it

and got a rocket shoved up their backsides at a Mansfield retail park so look that up as well

- shows they were aware they need to obey the law.

Dont forget, no PP no contract as you cannot agree to criminality

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 4 weeks later...

Hi all

 

Does the ParkingEye v Beavis help in any way?

 

I note that it tends to be used by parking companies to help their claim but I understand this is only attributable to just one only car park.

 

I have now recieved PE's submission all 68 pages of it all. I am going through it now carefully, but not too sure if I understand it all, I assume this is to confuse me into making an offer ..... no WAY I inmtend defending this to the hilt.

 

If anyone wants to see their submission I can scan it all (double sided so long time to scan it all lol).

Link to post
Share on other sites

have you found out if they have a proper contract with landowner and planning permission for their signage. these are the 2 points they are generally lazy about and are both killers as far as a claim goes.

 

PE V beavis means they dont have to give a schedule of loss and a penalty can apply in a non-commercial contract as long as it isnt just punitive and "not unconscionable".

 

 

PE still have to prove they have a right to make claims and that their signage is adequate but generally they get this right.

 

Your other main point is that the vehicle was not parked for the time claimed so no breach.

 

 

You still havent answered any of the original questions about where and when this event was,

we cant tailor our help as we dont know if the signage covers the land in question,

who owns it,

what arrangement the auction house has with the landowner and PE

 

 

so we are just shooting in the dark.

It has been a month of silence so pull your finger out and we will be able to help.

 

 

the exact wording on the signs may weel provide you with everything you need to defend but we will never know because you havent done your homework yet

Link to post
Share on other sites

FWIW I got a ticket from PE on a Morrisons car park, paid, stupidly, then rang Morrisons to complain and they got in touch with PE and got it revoked and the money returned to my account. I'd try the same with the auction house. It's not good PR, especially given that picking stuff up is something their customers are always going to be doing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
can you answer the questions I asked in the other thread you tacked you question on to,

it will be very helpful to know more about the site

 

When is the N1 claim dated

as you have a limited time to respond

but if you acknowledge the claim you then get another fortnight to submit a defence

so it may be worth considering using both times and use the difference to chase up the details we ask for.

 

The date was 1 June 2016

the date of the "offence" was 25th January 2016

 

I have responded within the timeframe.

 

The date was 1 June 2016

the date of the "offence" was 25th January 2016

 

I have responded within the timeframe.

 

The site is a multi company estate that has a auction house (where the vehicle was), a gym (small) and other businesses. There is a sign as you drive in stating that there is a charge, but does not say how much. the sign we saw stated that we had 1 hour free parking. (the vehicle went over by 9 minutes) but did say where the pay machine was.

 

PE has sent, as part of their submission a copy of a sign they use but it slightly different to the one I have photo of, I doubt it is enough to make much if any difference.

 

The reason the vehicle was on the site for over the allotted time was due to the fact that the auction house didn't open until 9:00 (we thought it was 8:30) and we had to wait for about 10 minutes while they got theirselves sorted and we could pay for the item (a large smartboard). Once the board was outside we had a lot of difficulty in getting the board into the car and ended up not being able to get it in or out, it had become stuck! this took a bit of time to remove as which point we drove away without the board and collected it later that day with a different vehicle.

 

I am a wondering about a different point as the car was not parked in a parking bay but outside the auction house, could this make a difference?

 

I want to upload a photo of the sign I saw inside the site but not sure how to do this. Again does this mean that I had no choice but to accept the "contract"? I do know PE is only the parking manager not the owner of the site.

 

This is the photo of the sign

Parking Eye Photo.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would really be tempted to contact the auction house and see if they will speak to Parking Eye.

Help us to keep on helping

Please consider making a donation, however small, if you have benefited from advice on the forums

 

 

This site is run solely on donations

 

My advice is based on my opinion and experience only. It is not to be taken as legal advice - if you are unsure you should seek professional help.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is another of the sign

 

Hi

 

I have got a copy of what they call their contract.

 

It looks like a standard contract (I am not legally trained to know this for sure) but the headings are blacked out as is the name of the person who signed the contract,

 

 

I am thinking it may be just a contract that has been put together.

 

 

It does say the name of the site but this is in a different colour to the rest of the contract.

 

The contract is also dated 11 December 2014 so I am wondering if the contracts is supposed to be renewed every year.

 

I have posted the signs further down the forum.

 

the land is owned by the land owners NOT PE.

 

There is another point;

 

 

their submission says that the vehicle had only 30 minutes free and if you look at the sign it says 1 hour free, I was there for 68 minutes and one second according to their information.

 

Another question; how often do the "clocks" need to be checked for accuracy?

Parking Eye Photo 2.pdf

Link to post
Share on other sites

regarding the accuracy of their ANPR,

it is not fit for purpose but that really isnt an argument that applies in your case.

 

However,

the claim of 30 minutes free parking and the contractual offer of an hours rather damns them when it comes to triviality and the BPA code of practice that allows at least 10 minutes to find a space read the contract, register and then afterwards reverse out of the parking spot and queue to go through the cameras again.

 

 

So, their claim is in breach of the CoP they agreed to to become an approved operator and and also "de minimis"

 

Post up the redacted contract and demand to see a copy that hasnt been redacted as it may have been signed by someone who has no authority to do so,

ie a managing agent for the site rather than the loandowner or their authorised representative.

 

also, WE STILL NEED TO KNOW WHERE THE HELL THIS ALL HAPPENED

I keep asking but you dont answer a straightforward question and that makes it difficult to offer proper advice.

 

an auction house?

where?

what does the signage say at the entrance to the land?

(we can google that when we have a street name and town)

who owns the car park,

the auction house or someone else?

is it shared land/access?

 

 

you may not know all of the answers but we cant look it up unless we are told where to start from.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, this occurred in a business centre that is privately owned by Hoults Yard, in Newcastle upon Tyne.

 

 

I haven't got any photos of the signage at the entrance

but this will be sorted as I have also noticed that PE put a photocopy of what they hope will be assumed as the actual signage.

The auction house is based in the site there.

 

I hope this is ok.

Link to post
Share on other sites

so, not an offer of a contract but an "invitation to treat".

 

 

there is nopthing on this siogn that says anything about paying them more than the tariff or what happens if you dont pay it.

 

 

Look up previous cases via parking prankster and search the term as well so you know the difference between that and a contract

 

YOU STILL HAVENT TOLD US THE ADDRESS OF THE SITE

your description is still to vague,

 

 

when parking eye wrote to you the NTK will have a description of the reason for claim and the address at which it occurred.

 

 

If that is wrong then there is no claim

so go and find the NTK and write down what it says on there

if you dont know the road or postcode.

 

 

You still arent helping yourself so start thinking and stop being lazy,

you need to get there and photograph the public highway,

the entrance from the public highway,

any signage that can be seen by a driver entering the private land,

any signs that are different to that at the entrance,

the ticket machine,

any signage next to the ticket machine that tells you what to do and contains other terms etc.

 

have you asked the auction house who owns the land?

What arrangements they have to use it

(these probably trump PE's claim if you took directions from them)

 

then you look into planning consent for PE signage and ticket machine,

 

 

they need it in law or they cant offer a contract in the first place.

 

 

read other posts here, it is all fairly common requests

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...